Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Cyclists: The scourge of our streets? Anti-cyclist program on Channel 5

cupid_stunt

cupid_stunt

Chief seagull hater & farmerbarleymow's nemesis.
Right, two parts to this, first the Channel 5 program tomorrow, which despite C-5 saying it's ‘an unfiltered look at both sides of the fence’, some cyclists have already got outraged over it! :facepalm:

New Channel 5 show ‘Cyclists: The scourge of our streets?’ sparks outrage - Cycling Weekly

Meanwhile, perhaps cyclists had some right to be outraged with this...

The editorial appeared in Grapevine magazine, which is delivered free to 23,000 homes in Sheffield each month, and recounted a conversation between editor Ian Macgill and an “old chum Mr Smith” in which the latter called for wire to be introduced at head height so pavement riders are “taught a lesson.”
https://www.holdthefrontpage.co.uk/...-to-republish-cyclist-decapitation-editorial/
Click to expand...
 
It seems to be the dog-whistle title of the show people are objecting to, but when they've clearly chosen that title on purpose to drum up some publicity (for example I now know to my mild surprise that channel 5 still exists) complaining about it is a bit of an own goal.
 
Unless that fella just wants to catch the penny farthing crowd then surely wire at cyclists head height would catch out a few pedestrians. He hasn't thought this through.
 
And whatever you think of head-high tripwires, it's worth noting that potential punishments for cyclists as espoused by some of us on these boards have included genital mutilation, ramming with motor vehicles and, in one particularly godwin's-testing example, forcible tattooing of children.
 
SpookyFrank said:
And whatever you think of head-high tripwires, it's worth noting that potential punishments for cyclists as espoused by some of us on these boards have included genital mutilation, ramming with motor vehicles and, in one particularly godwin's-testing example, forcible tattooing of children.
Click to expand...
Which would you support? Or have you an alternative to propose?
 
Pickman's model said:
Which would you support? Or have you an alternative to propose?
Click to expand...

I support helping middle aged men to confront their justifiable fears of mortality, inadequacy and impotence in an open, constructive way as a means of dramatically reducing the number of hollow, macabre and increasingly pathetic threats being made against people utilising an enjoyable and socially responsible form of transportation.
 
Last edited:
As a rural motorist cyclists don't really bother me any more than any other slow moving obstacle to be safely negotiated.

As a rural cyclist though, I don't enjoy mixing it with cars that are often being driven too fast and not giving me enough space. That can be a bit scary. Why should I be forced into the gutter?
 
SpookyFrank said:
I support helping middle aged men to confront their justifiable fears of mortality, inadequacy and impotence in an open, constructive way as a means of dramatically reducing the number of hollow, macabre and increasingly pathetic threats being made against people utilising an enjoyable and socially responsible form of transportation.
Click to expand...
And how do you express this support?
 
Shit show by shit TV channel

It openly “others” cyclists
The language of prejudice and hatred tends to have one thing in common – it seeks to creates “outgroups”, those who are seen as another, not part of the mainstream. At its more sinister ends, it also uses language which views the outgroup as somehow less than human.

Amazingly, the programme does both. The narration refers to “swarms” of cyclists, while one interviewee, a London taxi driver, likens them to “a plague of locusts coming down the road”.

Throughout, the narration repeatedly and deliberately talks of cyclists as the other – “this lot” as they are referred to at one point – while drivers are seen as the mainstream. A long section of the programme details the anti-cycling opinions of some London taxi drivers, who are introduced as “three of the city’s finest”.

The message could hardly be clearer.
Click to expand...
 
Fucking hell

The tone is absurdly apocalyptic
This is best exemplified by a ridiculous section on the number of leisure cyclists who ride on Box Hill in Surrey – “the adrenaline junkies infiltrating Box Hill”, as the narration puts it – which is portrayed as the opening front of the next world war.

“Life in leafy suburbia would never be the same,” says the narration, followed by frankly weird complaints about cyclists supposedly throwing away their water bottles – perhaps the ones that cost £5 or more each – and (I swear I’m not making this up) accusations that they “defecate in people’s front gardens”.

The absurdity grows as the programme follows a local man driving a vast 4x4 down narrow lanes, complaining he cannot overtake them on blind bends. “There is a limit of the number of cyclists you can have on our very, very small roads,” he says, without any apparent irony or self-awareness.

The same man ends by complaining that his 3,500-signature petition has not prompted stern government action: “I can envisage civil disorder happening on the roads if this situation is allowed to continue.”
Click to expand...
 
editor said:
Maybe they could follow up this show with "Selfish polluting arrogant cunts in 4x4s who are so fucking lazy they drive to the shops"?
Click to expand...
tbh the amount of pollution involved in getting goods to shops likely dwarfs any pollution from driving to the shops - for instance, fruit from south africa, egypt, peru doesn't float here on non-polluting rafts. better public transport would help reduce the number of people taking their cars to the shops.
 
Pickman's model said:
tbh the amount of pollution involved in getting goods to shops likely dwarfs any pollution from driving to the shops - for instance, fruit from south africa, egypt, peru doesn't float here on non-polluting rafts. better public transport would help reduce the number of people taking their cars to the shops.
Click to expand...
Yes, but that still doesn't negate the environmental damage done by lazy cunts driving oversized 4x4 vehicles 300 metres to the shop or local school, but thanks for pointing out the obvious anyway.

UK children inhaling toxic air on school run and in classroom
Two-thirds of teachers ‘support banning cars near school gates’
 
Was having a coffee the other day when a row broke out in the queue at the counter. One bloke was having a go at another for wrongly parking in the disabled space because he was "a lazy fat bastard who couldn't be bothered to walk the extra few yards" a bit of back and forth and empty threats later the bloke wrongly parked stormed out and drove off. I'd only taken another dip if my coffee when another row breaks out. A third bloke had also parked, wrongly, in the disabled space, and had started swearing at the first blonde to mind his own business etc. More threats, both physical and of social media postings are shout across the cafe.

...but tellingly the third bloke angrily shouted at the original complainant:

"I bet you're one of those committed cyclists ain't ya?" in a really pissed off tone...

:hmm:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Maggot
Apps for cyclists
Replies
6
Views
448
Winot
Winot
MrCurry
Highway solar panels with cyclists underneath - good idea, or not?
Replies
21
Views
764
gentlegreen
gentlegreen
editor
An unfolding mini-caravan for cyclists
2
Replies
57
Views
2K
Dogsauce
Dogsauce
T & P
Fined for returning a Zipcar to its designated spot in a restricted street- how is this right?
Replies
28
Views
1K
teuchter
teuchter
RileyOBlimey
Cyclist legally shoots scumbag motorist
2
Replies
56
Views
2K
JuanTwoThree
JuanTwoThree
Back
Top Bottom